Wuthering Heights wasn’t raunchy enough. There, I said it.After months of marketing that all but promised a cinematic climax on the Yorkshire moors, the new Wuthering Heights starring Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi left me doing something I did not expect: Waiting for it to get hotter. (...)If you are going to abandon strict period accuracy, fine. But commit to a world.Perhaps my bigger frustration is this: the film abandons some of the book’s core themes that were genuinely ahead of their time, particularly around race and rigid social hierarchy, yet it does not commit hard enough to the raunchy reimagining to justify the shift. If you are going to strip away Brontë’s grit, at least sex it up.Instead, it sits in an awkward middle ground. Not faithful enough to be literary. Not wild enough to be scandalous.In 2026, if you promise me torrid obsession on the moors, I expect torrid obsession.And frankly, I wanted more. (Georgia Clelland)
On paper, “Wuthering Heights” should be a formidable awards-season contender. Its early February release and divisive storytelling may prove a bridge too far for some audiences.The film’s technical achievements — from lavish production design and daring costuming to Sandgren’s sweeping VistaVision cinematography and a score by Anthony Willis alongside Charli XCX — could find themselves in contention a year from now.“Wuthering Heights” is a spectacle of original auteur filmmaking that demands to be seen in the best format possible. Cinephiles entering the theater with an open mind, ready to celebrate creative risktaking and bold iconography, should experience “Wuthering Heights” unbridled on the big screen rather than confined to a restrained home viewing. (Matt Ward)
Despite criticism, the film succeeds in capturing one of the novel’s essential themes, what happens when social class interferes with love and passion, allowing revenge and resentment to fester.Ultimately, the film presents a modern interpretation of Brontë’s Victorian tragedy, one that resonates with contemporary audiences drawn to stories of dark romance and emotional vulnerability.While it may not replicate the novel’s full depth, it offers a 21st-century lens that highlights how themes of class, obsession, and revenge remain deeply relevant today. (Gaby Collazo)
The film abandons literary fidelity to become something entirely new. The quotation marks do their job – this isn’t Brontë’s story – and Fennell’s central point lands with full force, women remain trapped by the structures men built.“Wuthering Heights” is messy, gorgeous, infuriating and unforgettable. Though it fails as an adaptation to honor the original story’s vision, the film traps viewers in its surprising beauty and makes the cost of desire impossible to ignore. (Alexis Coffee)
Overall, the movie is more of a lust story than a love story. The film received so much hype and popularity before its release because it features two attractive actors in the lead roles, reflecting marketing that prioritizes star power and physical appeal over narrative depth. Today’s audience is enticed and captured by films that feature attractive and famous actors, whether or not the movie itself is good. Wuthering Heights is proof that beautiful people brooding in dramatic lighting still need something to do.Apparently, love may be eternal, but plot development is optional. (Lucia Rose and Niya Desai)
I do applaud the ability of “Wuthering Heights” to take us beyond the bounds of character Nelly Dean’s narration and place the viewer in the estate itself. And we wardrobe admirers were able to get a good look at Jacqueline Durran’s handiwork, the saving grace of the entire production.I imagine that when Brontë conceptualized her masterpiece, Fennell’s interpretation was not at all what she had in mind. However, I encourage you to forget that the movie is an adaptation and give in to the fantastical world of beauty dressed by Durran and brought to life by Robbie and Elordi. There is something for everyone to admire. (Grace Schuringa)
The cinematography of the film is unquestionably stunning. The untamed, lonely and emotionally-charged nature of the surroundings is further supported by the scenery, which is both brutal and lovely in equal measure. Even when the adaptation deviates from the original novel, it does so with assurance and consistency, which serves to explain the film’s deviations. The story’s devastating attraction is reflected in the beauty, which is thematic rather than decorative.In finality, “‘Wuthering Heights’” is an adaptation that encourages discussion with the book rather than attempting to replace it. It offers an interpretation influenced by contemporary cinema, current discussions and a willingness to take chances, existing alongside Brontë’s text rather than in support of it. Although early suspicion is reasonable, if not justified, the movie demonstrates that change does not always equate to treachery or betrayal to the original text.“Wuthering Heights” 2026 is a daring, flawed and startling version that recognizes the original’s strength while daring to change it, producing something surprisingly captivating in the process. (Adisa Balic)
Overall, “Wuthering Heights” is an entertaining watch that maintains its entertainment value. This movie has remained divisive among audiences, but if you’re someone who enjoys melodrama and period romances, this movie could be for you. (Sage Mullins)
The result is a directionless experience that leads only toward confusion and irritation for its viewers, with the exception of those who are satisfied with well-composed images of beautiful people getting touchy amid beautiful backdrops. Stripped of most of its social context, these glamorous scenes of yearning and suffering for forbidden love are little more than moving pictures.There is aural beauty in this film. The original soundtrack album provided by Charli XCX is truly atmospheric, and conveys most of what little vision and intention the film possesses. It is the most original aspect of the film, but it also can’t make up for the overwhelming lack of substance or direction that permeates the rest of “Wuthering Heights.”The visuals fall into the same sort of purgatory. The costumes are aesthetically appealing, and it is no detriment per se that they obviously stray away from period-accurate fashion. Yet despite their intentionally evocative bodice-ripper romance novel aesthetic, every one of Earnshaw’s decadent dresses may as well be generated by artificial intelligence in its attempt to simulate intention that just isn’t there.The film’s leaning into physical passion is not the source of its lackluster storytelling either. It could have been ripe with meaning, as explicit imagery avails itself to a large array of critical commentary that could bear fruit. (Julie Huang)
A remarkable departure from past film versions was the exaggerated production design by Suzie Davies, done to contrast Cathy's lavish playground in Thrushcross Grove to her miserable home turf in Wuthering Heights. The Linton house was replete with over-the-top interiors and props, from the bedroom walls rendered in the color of Cathy's face, the enormous replica of the mansion with dolls inside made by hand with actual human hair, to those glazed shrimps and giant fruits garnishing the food on the ostentatious dining table.A markedly aggressive feature of the 2026 film was the overtly sexual Cathy-Heathcliff relationship. Previously, they were portrayed to be just limited to longing looks and repressed desire. Now, in the first hour, Heathcliff would chance upon Cathy's moments of intimate awakening, peeking at cavorting servants, and exploring herself behind the rocks. In the second hour, upon their reunion, Heathcliff and Cathy actually broke all boundaries and launched into a montage-ful of illicit sexual encounters both in- and outdoors. (Fred Hawson)
When you watch Wuthering Heights, are you going to get a movie that makes you feel good about love? About the realities of the class war? About Emerald Fennell as someone you want to have a beer with? No, probably. But you will leave with a new appreciation for how gnarly and revolting Wuthering Heights is as a text — and for the price of a dozen eggs. (Caroline Colvin)
Essentially, the film lacks detail and purpose. A thrilling, gothic story is canned in favor of a cowering, sexually inept, “modern” retelling. Fennell could have made a freaky “Wuthering Heights” if she so pleased, and also have been semi-true to the novel at the same time. Or, she could have made an entirely different movie, which she clearly intended to do anyways.Instead, the movie relies on shock value and odd euphemisms to deliver the macabre “twist” on the source material. It is crude, but passionless. They could maybe get away with that if it wasn’t being marketed as “the greatest love story of all time.”While watching, my main thought was: how is this adaptation so much, yet too little at the same time? How is this film aiming for ultra freaked-out and still landing upon clunky and juvenile? Why did this cost $80 million dollars to make?I’ll level with you — I was thinking the above thoughts while silently crying in my seat. So, it accomplished something.It’s not a true adaptation, and it’s not even a good half-adaptation. This may be a film I only recommend to select groups of people: the hate viewers, the Elordi and Robbie fans and the overly emotional. (Ava Brescia)
It leans much more synth than “Wuthering Heights,” but it has the same vibes of romantic yearning if that’s what you’re looking for. It’s also a lot more positive if you’re looking for a pick-me-up after listening to “Wuthering Heights.”Now that you have my opinions and my recommendations, you can gather that I am giving “Wuthering Heights” an unsuprising positive rating. (Meredith Young)
The “Wuthering Heights” soundtrack album is a perfect example of what it means for the standards of creation to be sky high, as they currently are for Charli xcx. It certainly justifies this expectation — just listen to “House featuring John Cale,” — but it also represents the pitfalls of catering to a wide variety of demands, with unique sounds suffering from an ensemble average of tastes that push them into sameness. (Alessandro M. M. Drake)
Charli XCX has done it again. Though “Wuthering Heights” is a complete diversion from 2024’s “Brat,” its full string arrangements, miserably romantic imagery and cinematic production makes the album not just a collection of songs, but an immersive experience that will make you want to run dramatically through the English moors. (Julia Vetsch)
Overall, I think the album is interesting for those who already have a liking for Charli xcx’s particular sound. The album is a blend of romantic, synth tones, dark and unsettling instrumentations, and Charli xcx’s iconic auto-tuned, filtered vocal sound. “Wuthering Heights” is definitely less upbeat pop than “Brat”, but it is still uniquely representative of Charli xcx’s sound as an artist. (Ella Mitchell)
“Wuthering Heights” is a satisfying listen as well as a canny solution to the problem of how to follow up a breakthrough record. (Mark Richardson)
In partnership with "WUTHERING HEIGHTS": Eucalyptus breathes cold across the moors, cassis and musk linger like mist, amber and sandalwood burn low—memory comes undone.The Come Undone Kit features Burn No. 3, Oil No. 0, and an exclusive poster + behind-the-scenes booklet—a collectible for film and fragrance lovers alike.On the Scent: Eucalyptus breathes cold across the moors, cassis and musk linger like mist, amber and sandalwood burn low—memory comes undone.Includes:Burn No. 3Melted into warmth, made to be poured. The flame between them never dies. A slow-burning ritual of skin and longing.Oil No. 0A quiet act of intimacy, made for what's felt more than said. Glides like memory; lingers like want.Exclusive Poster & BookletThe exclusive behind-the-scenes booklet traces the making of "Wuthering Heights" through the lens of desire, tension, and design. Where atmosphere becomes touch, and every frame pulls us closer to coming undone.
Wuthering HeightsFebruary 15, 2026For this week's main podcast review, Katie Johnson, Josh Parham, Cody Dericks, Giovanni Lago, and Daniel Howat join me to discuss the latest film from Emerald Fennell, "Wuthering Heights," starring Margot Robbie, Jacob Elordi, Hong Chau, Shazad Latif, Alison Oliver, Martin Clunes, and Ewan Mitchell. Adapted from Emily Brontë's 1847 novel, the film is a highly subjective reinterpretation by Fennell and has garnered a wide range of opinions and generated a ton of discourse surrounding the casting and book changes/omissions. What did we think of it? Please tune in as we discuss Fennell's direction, writing, the costumes, production design, cinematography, score, songs by Charli xcx, the performances and chemistry from Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi, its awards season chances, and more in our SPOILER-FILLED review. Thank you for listening. Come undone with us and enjoy (or let it drive you mad).
Warner Bros.’ “Wuthering Heights” remained at No. 1 at the U.K. and Ireland box office in its second weekend, taking £3.8 million ($5.3 million) and pushing its cumulative total to £16.2 million ($22.1 million), according to Comscore. (Naman Ramachandran)
After opening in second place over Valentine’s Day last weekend, Emerald Fennell‘s Wuthering Heights suffered a minuscule 16 percent drop to rise to the top of the Czech box office charts in its second weekend of release, according to data from the Czech Film Distributors Union. The Gothic romance starring Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi as ill-fated lovers Cathy and Heathcliff earned CZK 4.61 million to bring its two-week total to just north of CZK 13 million.
As a Yorkshire lass, Wuthering Heights holds a visceral place in my heart. I chose to view this new 2026 film adaptation not as the book I love, however, but as a standalone vision by director Emerald Fennell. Absolute purists will not enjoy this disconnected fantasy; it is certainly not Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights. But if you suspend expectations, it is an indulgent treat.The verdict? Emerald Fennell’s ‘make believe’ lacks the scent of windswept heather but has its own strange, man-made shine. Shallow, yes; glossy, certainly. Is it worth a watch? Yes – as long as you don’t expect the earthy style, substance, or plot of the book.
Going in, I expected something far more explicit. Instead, the film handled intimacy with surprising restraint. It was tasteful. Charged, yes, but never exploitative. There are a few moments that feel more distracting than seductive. But even that doesn’t tip into the film’s success. It just briefly pulls you out of the mood. At most, they briefly disrupt the atmosphere before it tightens its grip again.Wuthering Heights isn’t a comforting watch. It’s gothic in the truest senses: obsessive and morally-murky. It doesn’t glamorize love. It interrogates it. Is this what soulmates look like? Or is it what happens when two people mistake trauma for destiny? The film never gives you a clean answer. It just leaves you with the wind, the red, the silence and that love echoing in your head. Pleasure or death in Wuthering Heights are almost indistinguishable. (Savannah Stickrod-Worthen)
I loved that I thought back to the work of the poetic Emily with a new interpretation. And that my daughter could approach an old story with a contemporary lens. And I love that women made this. And they knew they would be criticised and hung high in the town square. They’re too old. Too blonde. Too much like Barbie. Too different from the book…but they did it anyway. Unapologetic.It made me realise why I have always found that bloody story so unsettling. Because I know what it is to be Cathy. That the darkness and shadow is not separate to me. It is me. I’m Cathy. I’ve come home.(Only thing I would have added at the end was Kate Bush.) (Mandy Nolan)
Without revealing salient plot points, Emerald Fennell (“Saltburn,” “Promising Young Woman”) focuses on tumultuous, obsessive lust – choosing overtly erotic style-over-substance – graphically chronicled in VistaVision by cinematographer Linus Sandgren and extravagantly enhanced by production designer Suzie Davies, set decorator Charlotte Diricks, costumer Jacqueline Durran and composer Charli xcx. (Susan Granger)
While Fennell may not have cared so much about the book-to-movie adaptation of it all, she nevertheless succeeded in making an entertaining and visually pleasing movie. (Liliana Hummel)
Still, much of Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” is a visual treat for the armchair traveler. You get to viscerally wander those wild, craggy Yorkshire moors (or wherever the film was shot). Cue the cheesy but irresistible image of Heathcliff (Jacob Elordi) riding off on a rearing steed against a flaming sunset after hearing of Cathy’s engagement to wealthy neighbor Edgar Linton (Shazad Latif). Fennell’s version of Thrushcross Grange, Linton’s estate, as a scarlet-and-gold candy box—with Cathy’s bedroom walls patterned after her skin—is preposterous but fun to gape at. As is Cathy’s elaborate, far-too-modern wardrobe, which features flounces, tinsel, and décolletage—call it Barbie Victorian. Gape is the operative word; this movie dumbs you down. [...]There’s been much verbiage about Fennell’s in-quotes version of “Wuthering Heights” and whether it violates the spirit of the original, blah blah. There’s no reason a film adaptation can’t create a parallel version of its primary source. I’ve always thought the film of The English Patient was perhaps better than the novel, thanks to Ralph Fiennes and Kristin Scott Thomas—particularly the way the film clarified certain scenes that were illegible in the novel. Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” is notable for its ambition, production values, and the sheer chutzpah of attempting to bring such a cherished masterwork of English literature to the screen. But none of that has resulted in a good film. (Erica Abeel)
Taking into account these clashing elements and reviews, the film has shown itself to be complex, visually extravagant and emotionally charged, but often lacking in character depth and Brontë’s overall message regarding class, identity and the destructive nature of obsessive love. (Polina Akulova)
If you want to look at something pretty, see Elordi be mildly freaky and lots of aesthetic color choices, go see the movie. If you want to see something romantic, tragic, and with the substance of the novel — particularly a layered tragedy based on the abuses society deals to its most marginalized, and how love can still grow despite this — skip it. (Nazjai Dickson)
When looking at “Wuthering Heights” both individually and in the context of the career Charli xcx has enjoyed, it is impossible not to love it. Though not as strong as some of her previous works, it is a spectacular addition to her catalog that is deserving of immense praise. It is a reminder that, despite whatever happens, Charli will do what she wants to do to fulfill her artistic mission and create something extraordinary along the way. (Layne Heath)
It’s a bright, crisp, perfect winter’s day as I cross the moors towards Haworth, and the north feels anything but grim as I take in the sweeping views before me.This is Brontë country, a landscape immortalised by the literary sisters in the pages of their world-famous novels.Some footpath signs to sites made famous through their association with the Brontë's books are written in Japanese and English, an indication of how popular this corner of Yorkshire is for enthusiasts worldwide.For many who visit, this isn’t just a day out, it’s a pilgrimage - a chance to step into the world that shaped some of the greatest novels in English literature.The charm of Haworth and the surrounding area is being appreciated by an even wider audience, thanks to social media platforms like TikTok and Instagram. (Felicity Macnamara)
Series: Colouring After DarkImprint: Wren & RookISBN: 9781526368348February 12, 2026Enter the windswept world of Wuthering Heights in this richly detailed colouring book, inspired by one of literature’s most haunting love stories and the new feature film adaptation starring Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi.Perfect for snuggling up in cosy candlelight after dark, this beautifully illustrated colouring book features 20 atmospheric scenes to colour – from wild Yorkshire landscapes and grand manor houses to candlelit rooms, roaring fires and secret, stolen glances. Each page captures the passion, drama and intensity that define Emily Brontë’s timeless tale.Blending cosy comfort with dark academia aesthetics, this gothic romance colouring book is perfect for quiet evenings, mindfulness relaxation and literary escapism. Featuring selected quotes, excerpts and character profiles, it makes the perfect gift for classic literature lovers and anyone enchanted by brooding moors and star-crossed love.
Deadline hears that The White Lotus and Sex Education star Aimee Lou Wood is attached to star in a new TV adaptation of Charlotte Brontë’s classic novel Jane Eyre.Emmy nominee Wood will play the indomitable heroine in the buzzy adaptation, which we understand is being produced by UK powerhouse Working Title and is penned by Miriam Battye, a WGA Award winner for her work on Succession.We hear there are advanced discussions with a UK broadcaster to join the project. (Andreas Wiseman)
Plenty of other news outlets repeat the news: Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, Harper's Bazaar...
Nestled among the wide-open moors of West Yorkshire sits Haworth, the English village where Emily Brontë wrote “Wuthering Heights,” the gothic romance that inspired Hollywood’s latest steamy adaptation.The cobblestone streets and rugged hills here still conjure the hardscrabble life and wild forces of nature that underpin the novel.As it did in 1847, when the book was published, the region offers a window into the stark contrasts and economic struggles that challenge Britain. Now, as then, social and demographic change, rising food prices and widening wealth inequality are driving populist political movements, calls for reform and spasms of unrest.Haworth is eight miles from Bradford, a town that Emily’s father, Patrick, visited often in his role as an Anglican priest. In the mid-19th century, Bradford was a wealthy, fast-growing center of textile manufacturing, home to powerful parliamentary lawmakers and a destination for tourists and traders.The city’s decline is typical of the hollowing-out of many postindustrial towns and cities in northern England, fueling the poverty and frustration that are shaking up British politics. [...]One afternoon in November, tourists gathered to listen to a banjo player outside the Villette Coffee House in Haworth. Couples walked their dogs. Parents struggled to push their strollers along the deeply rutted cobblestones.Bradford’s woes can seem far from here.Many people believe, incorrectly, that the Brontë siblings grew up in a remote, backward place.As Juliet Barker writes in “The Brontës,” Haworth was actually “a busy, industrial township” with 13 small textile mills in the area when Patrick Brontë became curate in 1820. The village had its own surgeon, a wine merchant, a watchmaker and three cabinetmakers. It was overcrowded, however, and had primitive sanitation. An 1850 report found that more than 2 in 5 children died before their sixth birthday and average life expectancy was under 26 years.While Bradford now struggles economically, Haworth became a destination for literature fans around the world, exemplifying the value of Britain’s heritage to its tourism industry, which employs over a million people and contributes more than $100 billion a year to the economy.A local couple spent one Saturday stringing bunting from the wooden beams of Haworth’s recently refurbished old schoolhouse building, where Charlotte Brontë, Emily’s older sister and the author of “Jane Eyre,” had her wedding reception in 1854. Down the street, tourists quietly filed through the Brontë home that is now a museum. Outside, the moors stretch as far as the eye can see, rolling hills of dark green and brown divided by bare stone walls. (Michael D. Shear)
Wuthering Heights fans have gone wild after Cliff Richard's 90s musical based on the novel, which he co-wrote and starred in as Heathcliff, has gone viral.Aussie Jacob Elordi may be smouldering on screen in Emerald Fennell's new big screen adaption, but first came Sir Cliff, now 85, with his own strangely wig and questionable Yorkshire accent.Gone is the crooner's squeaky clean persona to play the rogue in the 1996 show which was a huge hit with fans but loathed by critics, who hit out at Cliff's casting. [...]Taking to TikTok fans joked: 'This is what Emily Brontë would have wanted!': 'Cliff heard a Yorkshire accent, once, in a dream': 'I'm screaming!!': 'Sorry but this is what all movie to musical adaptations sound like to me': 'Why didn't they call it Heathcliffe Richards?': 'I am only surprised that Cilla Black wasn't cast as Cathy'. (Geraint Llewellyn)
That’s a real shame, considering how interesting Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” is if you can divorce yourself from the film’s source material, as its writer-director does with palpable glee. Her take is a maelstrom of splendid beauty and doomed love, colliding at a feverish pace that makes the fidelity to Brontë’s book moot. This is Fennell’s vision, her creation. Its bones are the same, but its cells are different. Why, then, is Fennell’s adaptation of a classic met with such ruthless scrutiny, when another recent Jacob Elordi-starring remix on an equally beloved, oft-remade tale — Guillermo del Toro’s “Frankenstein” — was lauded by both critics, viewers and awards bodies alike?Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” pivots the novel toward fantastical anachronism and open-hearted femininity, while del Toro’s “Frankenstein” is a dour, dark spin that blunts the sentimentality of Mary Shelley’s book for an adaptation that plays more like a superhero origin story. Both filmmakers chose to make Elordi their 6 ‘6 muse, using his imposing stature to their gain — strong and rugged as Fennell’s Heathcliff, while towering and intimidating as del Toro’s Creature — and the cinematic story arcs for both characters regularly deviate from their respective novels. Despite these and other glaring similarities between these films released just four months apart, only one movie was met with virulent animosity from the jump, and somehow, it wasn’t the worst movie of the two. This isn’t just the latest layer in the longtime double standard for films made by women compared to those made by men; the reaction also indicates a frightening lack of curiosity among stubborn viewers unwilling to consider a reality beyond a prevailing narrative. [...]That may be the most disturbing aspect of all. Whether people enjoy Fennell’s work is a matter of personal taste. But refusing to keep an open mind and stay curious about a film simply because of a filmmaker’s reputation for (relatively tame!) smuttiness is detrimental to the cinema that Fennell’s critics purport to uphold. “Wuthering Heights” may not be to many people’s taste, but what Fennell has done is irrefutably interesting. She’s made something different from your typical adaptation, a movie that brings a fresh perspective to a very old and frequently retold tale. How very frustrating that so many people have closed off their minds and hearts to the film before they’ve even seen it, or before the credits rolled. Such baseless reticence only makes us more defiant and less inquisitive. Social media might be the modern watercooler — the dominating force of cultural conversation — but taking its narratives as gospel without considering art for ourselves only reinforces our worst instincts and upholds the systems that a surprising, offbeat and altogether different film like “Wuthering Heights” rallies against. (Coleman Spilde)
Wuthering Heights may be romantic for some, but in today’s culture, no one ought to regard the relationship between Cathy and Heathcliff as something to aim for; it’s at best absent, and at worst innately toxic. (Annie Dabb)
It’s Alison Olivier’s character, Isabella, in particular, whose journey embodies the symbolism behind the ribbons. At her residence, Thushcross Grange, the wealthy, sheltered young woman spends her days in a room dedicated to sashes and bows, making creations like dolls crafted from human hair. While her proclivities may make her appear naive, her girlishness ultimately comes to represent her own self-discovery and how she revels in control. [...]In the second part of Isabella’s arc, her hair is now worn loose, but bows and rosettes still line her gowns. Oliver plays the character like she’s constantly frothing at the mouth, eager for something more, but she’s still the woman with the ribbon room in these fetishistic scenes; she’s just now allowed herself to come undone. (Sadie Bell)
If one can separate Fennell’s adaptation from its source material, it’s altogether captivating. However, the film’s title, enclosed in quotation marks, emphasizes an important point: It is only “Wuthering Heights” in essence. Fennell’s version raises a consequential question — if you replace a story’s substance, is it still the same story? How much can creative liberty justify before an adaptation becomes a rip-off? (Abbey Conley)
Actually, the whole film is probably best enjoyed as a kind of offshoot of Barbie. Call it “Wuthering Heights Barbie,” featuring the famous doll boxed up in a tightly corseted nineteenth-century gown with BDSM accessories like whips and hangman’s nooses and horse’s bridles. It’s also sold with an elaborate new Barbie’s Dreamhouse, the glamorously dreary Gothic version, with a dark-haired Ken in heavy sideburns grinning fondly at Barbie from the doorway. And Fennell has thought of practically all the sex positions those blank-eyed dolls can be put into, with their arms that go up and down, and bendy joints, and heads that turn all the way around! (Eileen Jones)
“Wuthering Heights” is the rare studio film where the below-the-line work doesn’t support the vision — it is the vision. Having been introduced to Emerald Fennell’s filmmaking through that Promising Young Woman panel, watching the team she has built and the scale at which they now operate, this is exactly the trajectory you hoped for. The moors look magnificent, the obsession feels real, and the craft is impeccable. This is a film made by people who care deeply about every frame — and it shows. (Byron Burton)
What fascinates is not whether this adaptation is faithful, but why it feels so precisely calibrated to now. We live in a culture that celebrates emotional extremity, provided it remains interpretable and contained. We want intensity, but we want distance from its consequences. We want the experience of witnessing emotional chaos without surrendering to its destabilising force.This film reflects that instinct. It offers devastation as an encounter rather than a transformation. Something to observe, not something that alters you. In doing so, it adapts not just Wuthering Heights, but our diminished tolerance for emotional risk. The original story confronted readers with emotional violence that refused resolution or distance. This version allows you to remain safely outside it.I left impressed by its craft, but more struck by what its restraint represented. The film doesn't weaken the story so much as reveal the conditions under which stories now exist. They must be legible. They must be shareable. They must survive translation into image.The moors remain wild. What has changed is our willingness to be undone by them. (Anoushka Madan)
Fennell’s masterpiece (so far) is her 2020 thriller “Promising Young Woman” starring Carey Mulligan. That film earned Fennell a well-deserved Oscar for Best Original Screenplay. Her ultra-weird 2023 offering “Saltburn” (also starring Elordi) was a letdown. “Wuthering Heights” falls somewhere in the middle. Unfortunately, the best compliment I can pay “Wuthering Heights” is to say it’s not as bad as you’ve heard. But I realize that is faint praise, at best. (Andy Ray)
I feel this film is adequately okay. It is not a conventional period drama, but it’s also not a smoothly organized one (or a carefully designed one) either. (Casey Allen)
The film’s abrupt ending inverts our expectations, circling back to Cathy and Heathcliff in their youth. They are bonded from the very beginning until the very end. Cathy is headstrong in defending Heathcliff against her father, even when it scares her. Heathcliff is guarded and protects Cathy, even when it costs him. We see just how much each of their inner children resurface in their adult relationship: Deep down, they are emotionally sensitive, although they fight to appear otherwise, both to outsiders and each other.In my viewing experience, I felt compelled to consider the notion of forgiveness. At one point, Cathy says to Heathcliff, “You’re too late,” and I was left asking: When is it too late, and where do forgiveness and regret intersect? I find myself still pondering these questions as I write this, a few days after my viewing. I’m unsure whether I appreciate or detest these unanswered questions, but perhaps that’s what Fennell’s “‘Wuthering Heights’” is all about — an invitation to face those haunting thoughts, whether we like them or not. (Olivia Barkwill)
For those avid Brontë fans willing to loosen their grip on strict fidelity, the film offers something compelling - a strikingly immersive and carefully curated vision that asserts its own identity. [...]It's dramatic, gruesome, and confrontational - Fennell immediately signals that this will not be a museum piece adaptation. [...]These changes transform ambiguous cruelty into explicit manipulations, heightening emotional stakes and making the story more immediate and cinematic for modern viewers. Fennell clearly favors intense layered drama. (Nawal Ahmad)
At the time of its 1847 publication, Brontë’s novel was considered brutal and coarse, devoting unconventional time to themes of female liberation and the racial hierarchy of late Georgian England. In her film adaptation, Fennell has stripped the story of most of this core meaning. Instead, she injects “Wuthering Heights” with excessive and shiny contemporary touches as though they automatically make the film subversive and thought-provoking for modern audiences. (Isabella Konecky)
Fennell set out to recreate how the novel felt at 14: intoxicating, dangerous, erotic. And at moments, she succeeds. It comes across very differently from Brontë's original novel, which endures by being about two forces so volatile that they destroy everything around them, including themselves, not because of how sexy or shocking the story is, as Fennel depicts in this film adaptation. (Nora Siddique)
Conversely, Fennell’s adaptation is messy and watered down, all tied up in a pretty little bow that fails to mask its disingenuity.Some may argue that the quotation marks around the film’s title suggest that it is merely an interpretation. However, Fennell’s film borrows too much from the source material to be thought of as anything other than an adaptation. As much as I tried to see this film as its own entity separate from the novel, at the end of the day it cannot be totally removed from the context of the original work. As hard as Fennell tried to depict Wuthering Heights in her own way, she missed the mark entirely, making a mockery of Brontë’s magnum opus. (Sarah Toman)
A gorgeous set design is not enough to make up for a flawed production that badly misinterprets the story Emily Bronte set forth to tell in the 19th century. There are a bare handful of good moments, but it isn't nearly enough to save the film from itself. Should be remembered as a cautionary tale as to how adapting a book can go wrong even with the best of intentions. (Becky O'Brien)
A filmmaker with genuine concern for her characters’ minds, hearts, and bodies alike could have perhaps employed this approach to mine the material for a new and unique interpretation. Fennell, instead, has not created a film but a walking, talking, sexual Pinterest board—maybe a fine Bridgerton fanfic, but no excuse to desecrate a classic. (Avantika Jagdhari)
Esta interpretación entiende que el verdadero terror de amar no radica en perder al otro, sino en descubrirse irreversiblemente transformado por ese vínculo.Y es precisamente en esa devastación emocional donde radica su fuerza, en recordarnos que las historias de amor más memorables no son las que consuelan, sino las que dejan una marca imborrable. (Mónica Castellón) (Translation)
Speaker: Charlotte Jones, Education OfficerTuesday 24th February 6:30pmBronte Birthplace, 72-74 Market Street, Thornton, BD13 3HFStep into the turbulent world of the Brontë sisters and explore why their novels shocked, unsettled, and enthralled 19th‑century readers with our Education Officer, Charlotte Jones. This talk examines how Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights, and The Tenant of Wildfell Hall challenged Victorian expectations around morality, gender, class, religion, and emotional restraint.Filled with passionate heroines, morally complex characters, and unflinching portrayals of desire, anger, and independence, the Brontës’ novels were seen by many critics as dangerous, improper, or even immoral. Why did reviewers struggle to believe such bold, transgressive stories were written by women—and what anxieties did these books provoke?With the release of the new Wuthering Heights film, this talk offers the perfect chance to look beyond the screen and return to the fierce, unsettling novel that inspired it. We’ll explore how Emily Brontë’s original vision compares with modern interpretations, why filmmakers continue to be drawn to its wild emotional landscape, and what the latest adaptation reveals about the story’s enduring power. Whether you’re coming fresh from the cinema or revisiting the book, this session opens up the raw, radical heart of Wuthering Heights in a whole new way.
%20(1).v1.jpg)
by Gracie Oddie-JamesAudible OriginalsLength: 2 hrs and 32 minsDirected by Mahalia BeloProduced by Nicole DavisStarring Daryl McCormack (Good Luck to You, Leo Grande) as Heathcliff; with Arinzé Kene (The Pass), Charlie Rowe (Slow Horses), Gracie Oddie-James (The Lady from the Sea), Sagar Radia (Industry), Raffey Cassidy (The Brutalist) and Tanya Moodie (Silo).A feverish re-imagining of literature’s most infamous romantic villain.The Heathcliff we know is obsessive, possessive and cruel, bound and beholden to his childhood love and would-be soulmate Catherine, and their home at Wuthering Heights. But before his descent into monstrous revenge, there were three missing years. A time of possibility, freedom and a different kind of love…With Cathy’s rejection burning hot in his ears, Heathcliff flees the moors and arrives in London, seeking distraction and oblivion. There he is rescued by Sir Francis Barber, the Black adopted son of Samuel Johnson who urges him to forge his own path. Along the way he meets the reckless gambler, Lord Montgomery and the beautiful courtesan Rhoda Pascal, and begins to chart a path towards fortune, and belonging. In growing closer to Rhoda, he starts to untangle the mystery of who he is, but Cathy's ghostly presence, calling to him like a siren song, draws him ever back to his own dark nature, and the bewildering memories of Wuthering Heights...
This weekend at the global box office was the tale of two holdovers as “Wuthering Heights” waltzed to $150 million while “GOAT” hit the $100 million mark.Director Emerald Fennell’s gothic romantic drama “Wuthering Heights,” which ceded the top spot in North America to “GOAT,” was No. 1 at the international box office with $26.3 million from 76 markets. In a theatrical surprise, the R-rated film has been a bigger draw overseas with ticket sales having climbed to $91.7 million to date. Top foreign territories include the United Kingdom with $22.5 million, Italy with $9.4 million and Australia with $8.3 million. So far, “Wuthering Heights” has grossed $151.7 million worldwide against an $80 million production budget. (Rebecca Rubin)
Last weekend on Valentine's Day, I sat down at the movie theater with my three best friends from home, celebrating the holiday the best way I saw fit: watching the new “'Wuthering Heights' ” film. I was glued to the screen the moment the scene opened with groaning sounds, and uncontrollable tears fell down my face as the credits rolled almost 2.5 hours later.So it was much to my surprise when I opened the Letterboxd app once back at home to see the movie only had 2.8/5 stars and a plethora of negative reviews, all with much the same sentiment: Emily Brontë would be disappointed by Emerald Fennell ’s portrayal of her story. [...]While I didn’t feel this strongly on the topic of titles before I watched “'Wuthering Heights,'” I think movies need to be enjoyed for their simple craft and not whether or not they are exactly like the original source. And frankly, not everyone reads every book ever written. I don’t want to love a movie so deeply and be met with contorted faces and silent judgment, just because I didn’t read the book and notice every difference between the two.It’s inevitable that a screen adaptation will not maintain every single plot point of its original book, but directors can make a simple fix to avoid total hatred of their productions: just change the name. (Rebecca Savidge)
Firstly, let's quickly address whether Wuthering Heights could have existed in its original form — it certainly could, and predictably will again (I foresee a historical limited series adaptation asap), but that doesn't mean Fenell's vision shouldn't have a right to exist either.But let's face it, would the dating standards of 1847 translate to today? I'd hazard a guess that 2026 audiences wouldn't particularly enjoy watching their internet boyfriend, Jacob Elordi, in his full monstrous glory as Heathcliff, a character who didn't simply use his wife Isabella to torment Cathy, but physically and emotionally abused her in the novel… and murdered her dog.Audiences certainly wouldn't root for him and Margot Robbie's Catherine after enduring such horrific scenes.Fennell's story is still a romance — it's just not the type we're used to seeing play out.For one thing, Heathcliff and Catherine are both largely terrible people. That's just a fact. In many ways, they do deserve each other — if anything, to keep them away from everyone else.This is the kind of toxic love story that I, personally, can't get enough of. And these kinds of anti-love stories have a place in pop culture — even if they don't fit neatly into the romance box. (Tara Watson)
Ultimately, Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” feels like a ‘cynical co-option‘ of a radical text. The film reaches for mature emotional complexity but lands instead on the simplistic, all-consuming feelings of teenage infatuation. By reducing Brontë’s examination of class structures and racial othering to surface-level eroticism, it sidesteps the very discomfort the novel was designed to elicit.The film’s poster famously puts the title in quotation marks, perhaps signalling Fennell’s awareness that this is a limited interpretation rather than a faithful adaptation. Yet, in a world where elite male violence is still routinely excused as complicated behaviour, we do not need another “Wuthering Heights” that makes abuse look like a high-fashion editorial. We need adaptations that refuse to make the destruction of human beings look beautiful. We need art that recognises that when violence is aestheticised without political clarity, it ceases to be a critique and becomes an enablement.Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights”, for all its vibrant visuals and maximalist noise, remains a missed opportunity to address the very real and ugly ghosts of our present moment. (Aryaa Singh)
Fennell did what she set out to do when making this film. She wanted to make a version of “Wuthering Heights” that reflected what she remembered from reading it for the first time as a teen.In that regard, this film succeeds as a heart-racing, sweeping dark romance. By thinking about this film as just that, it’s pretty successful. The film depicts the lure and attraction of this doomed romance, even if it’s a bit overplayed. However, to achieve this, it becomes far less interesting than the original novel to the point of making viewers wonder why the film is called “Wuthering Heights” in the first place. (Kristopher Caalim)
Not every film needs to be deep or meaningful, but it would be nice if filmmakers could respect their audience with subtlety and take a commentary further than the superficial every now and again. Fennell instead squandered a golden opportunity to bridge the divide between literature snobs and casual romance enjoyers. I’ll get off my soapbox now, but this movie was not “‘porn’ for women.” It was porn for Emerald Fennell.Was I successfully rage baited by this “adaptation”? Yes. But Fennell’s superficiality and mishandling of her source’s thematic elements in favor of flashy aesthetics is simply a symptom of a much more serious disease: It is art in the age of TikTok.TLDR: In the immortalized words of bk on Letterboxd, “Emerald Fennell to film is what Colleen Hoover is to literature.” (Uma Nathan)
Favoring excess over austerity, Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” has a different spirit than Brontë’s novel. The novel’s narrator, Lockwood, says, “They [Catherine and Heathcliff] are afraid of nothing.” But they might be afraid of this film. It is a ghost of their story. (Jason Mulvihill)
En definitiva, esta versión de Cumbres borrascosas parece realizada para los que disfrutaron de Barbie. Los que busquen verdadera emoción no la encontrarán aquí. (Julio Vallejo) (Translation)
Written by Sarah GordonDirected by Amber WalshMain Stage Chorley Theatre,Dole Lane, Chorley, Lancashire, PR7 2RL.February 23rd-28thCharlotte Brontë has a confession about how one sister became an idol, and the other became known as the third sister. You know the one. No, not that one. The other, other one… Anne.This is not a story about well-behaved women. This is a story about the power of words. It’s about sisters and sisterhood, love and jealousy, support and competition.Sarah Gordon’s play is an irreverent retelling of the life and legend of the Brontë sisters, and the story of the sibling power dynamics that shaped their uneven rise to fame.
Director Amber Walsh says “through sharp humour and a knowing look at how history picks its favourites, the play looks at sibling rivalry, creativity, and the erasure of women writers from history.”“This is not a story about well-behaved women, it’s about the power of words, love and jealousy” (Ian Robinson)
%20(1).v1.jpg)
by Essie FoxOrenda BooksISBN: 9781917764421February 2026
The greatest tragic love story ever told – but this time, Catherine tells it herself. In Catherine, Essie Fox breathes new life into Wuthering Heights, transforming a gothic masterpiece into a haunting confession of obsession, madness and love that even death cannot end.With a nature as wild as the moors she loves to roam, Catherine Earnshaw grows up alongside Heathcliff, a foundling her father rescued from the streets of Liverpool. Their fierce, untamed bond deepens as they grow – until Mr Earnshaw’s death leaves Hindley, Catherine’s brutal brother, in control and Heathcliff reduced to servitude.Desperate to protect him, Catherine turns to Edgar Linton, the handsome heir to Thrushcross Grange. She believes his wealth might free Heathcliff from cruelty – but her choice is fatally misunderstood, and their lives spiral into a storm of passion, jealousy and revenge.Now, eighteen years later, Catherine rises from her grave to tell her story – and seek redemption.Essie Fox’s Catherine reimagines Wuthering Heights with beauty and intensity – a haunting, atmospheric retelling that brings new life to a timeless classic and lays bare the dark heart of an immortal love.
A view of Whitby Abbey framed by a whalebone arch under a cloudy sky, showcasing historical architecture in North Yorkshire, England.Sometimes, when a storm hits the UK, rain batters the pavements and wind whips the trees, it's easy to feel swept up in the kind of awe-inspiring conditions that helped Emily Brontë to write her classic novel, Wuthering Heights.There is a little town in Yorkshire, 100miles from Cathy and Heathcliff's home, but steeped in as much Gothic drama, where every day feels like you've tumbled into such dark Victorian melodrama. (...)If you walk along the coast from the nearby villages of Saltmoore and Sandsend, the gothic ruins stay within your sightline. Lucky hikers will get to see the sea fog - which locals used to believe was the fiery breath of a dragon - come in to cover the abbey. You'll feel like you're trekking the same paths Heathcliff did as he searched for Catherine's ghost, not least because Emerald Fennell's new film was shot about two hours away, in the Yorkshire Dales. (...)The most remarkable sight comes when you walk back towards Whitby, as when the fog clears, the Abbey can be seen looming through a gap between the cliffs. It's terrifying and awe-inspiring all at once. I felt drawn towards the ruins, much as Cathy is drawn to Heathcliff or as an entranced Lucy is drawn to Dracula. How could anyone resist such a terrible sight? (Yasmin Vince)
I was advised to visit Hill Garden and I’m so glad I did. The sun shone down on the terrace, and it was a nice place to sit and gather my thoughts after having walked around for a couple of hours. I’ve been reading Wuthering Heights in preparation for the new movie that’s coming out in a few days, and I couldn’t help but feel like Hill Garden came straight out of a Brontë novel. (Helena Sauriat)
The brutal Brontës! Wuthering Heights author Emily beat up her dog, toothless Charlotte spitefully held back Anne's career and all three died close to their 30th birthdays... not to mention their opium addict brother.
The famous family of writers endured everything from opium addiction to water contaminated by a cemetery, as well as a string of tragically early deaths that saw three out of four siblings - including their only brother, Branwell - deceased within a year of one another, all close to their 30th birthdays.And their precocious beginnings are almost as well documented as their 'spiteful' attitudes, with biographers remarking on the sisters' history with animal abuse, disdain of young children and 'anger management issues'.As revealed by literary critic Claire Harman in Charlotte Brontë: A Life, there was also the matter of the sisters' 'plain' and 'poorly' appearance.According to the writer, Emily had a large protruding tooth, while Charlotte had hardly any teeth at all.Undersized and undernourished, she was described by her fellow novelist, Elizabeth Gaskell, as having a forehead that was 'square, broad and rather overhanging'.Emily, for one, while posted at Law Hill School in Halifax, reportedly said she 'preferred the company of the house dog' over her pupils, as shared by author Juliet Barker.
And while not as combustible as her sister, Charlotte wasn't to be trifled with either. When she taught at a girls' school in Brussels, she gave any student who displeased her a tremendous tongue-lashing.'If those girls knew how I loathed their company, they would not seek mine as much as they do,' she wrote in her journal.In fact, several of her pupils seemed to have loathed her as much as she loathed them - one even threw a stone at her.
Charlotte's family, it seems, were not immune from her criticisms. In an introduction to her sister Anne's second novel, Charlotte shared that 'Wildfell Hall it hardly appears to me desirable to preserve'.'The choice of subject in that work is a mistake – it was too little consonant with the character – tastes and ideas of the gentle, retiring, inexperienced writer,' she continued.Historians have dubbed the jabs an attempt to 'consign her sister’s novel to oblivion'.Emily's temperament was also well known and has been a topic of discussion for historians - despite claims that Charlotte had tried to 'clean up' her sister's image posthumously.
Sex-mad doggers are romping in the countryside that inspired Wuthering HeightsAs new raunchy film version of Wuthering Heights has just hit cinemas randy revellers are getting frisky where the Brontë sisters penned their acclaimed books.And we can reveal that randy revellers are getting frisky where the Brontë sisters penned their acclaimed books. There’s plenty of bodice-ripping action as lust-crazed couples invade the moors around the picturesque parish of Haworth for bawdy al-fresco frolics. (John Ward)
And Jacob reveals there was sizzling chemistry between him and Margot, who plays love-struck Cathy, from the moment they met.He said: “It’s like, ‘Action’ and it’s like a horse at the race track — straight out of the gates.”But he insists that sex scenes are actually “no different to choreo- graphing a fight scene or a dance sequence”, explaining: “It’s super- technical, especially the scene where, it’s not a sex scene, but where I’m on top [of Margot] with my hands — that’s choreographed because, in that kind of light, you only have so much space to move. (Nadia Cohen)
A (Leeds) reader of The Sunday Times defends Jacob Elordi's Yorkshire accent in the film.
Most film adaptations of Wuthering Heights leave half the story untold. And while Emerald Fennell’s steamy adaptation may have caused a surge in sales of Emily Brontë’s novel, it is very much a different creation. The Easy Classics version follows the original far more literally.
However, the true failing of “Wuthering Heights” lies in its unwillingness to offer anything genuinely new. We are, perhaps, well past the cultural moment where explicit sex alone can pass for provocation. The shock value has dulled, and what remains feels curiously dated. The omission of the novel’s second half, a section frequently sacrificed in screen adaptations of Wuthering Heights, further positions this film as just another iteration: more polished, glamorous and decidedly raunchier than its predecessors, yet reluctant to meaningfully reinterpret its source material. The whirlwind sexual crescendo ultimately achieves little. Cathy’s fate is preordained and her death carries no tragic inevitability when the emotional groundwork has been hollowed out.Gothic literature thrives on transgression and repression: on the past’s refusal to remain buried. Strip away those tensions, and what remains is superficial. Here, the Gothic is reduced to aesthetic texture: wind-swept moors, crimson palettes, feverish bodies, a dark synth-pop soundtrack. Its spirit—moral rot, psychological cruelty, generational obsession—is conspicuously, and regrettably, absent. In the end, while “Wuthering Heights” may dazzle the eye, it hollowly fails to evoke Brontë’s corrosive psychological and social commentary in favour of lavish spectacle, sexualised shock, and aestheticised cruelty. (Hannah Tang in Strand Magazine)
I am a deeply proud Northern lass, and not many media pieces ever acknowledge our little corner of the world. Emily Brontë and her sisters were deeply inspired by the Moors in which they resided. It influenced their writing and greatly impacted their local community for what is now well over the past 170 years. It saddens me that Emily’s deeply intelligent work is being passed off as what is essentially explicit fanfiction (seriously, what was up with kneading the bread?) If this piece wins any awards, I will be questioning Hollywood’s, obviously declining, sanity. (Lily Orton in HerCampus)
Does all this contemporary hindsight into the fabric of Brontë’s epic novel make for a quintessential “Wuthering Heights?” Even allowing that such a thing were possible, probably not. While it presents a stylishly crafted and thrillingly cinematic take on this complex classic, richly enhanced by a superb and adventurous cast, it’s not likely to satisfy anyone looking for a faithful rendition, nor does it reveal a new angle from which the “romance” at its center looks anything other than toxic — indeed, it almost fetishizes the dysfunction. Even without the thorny debate around Heathcliff’s racial identity, there’s plenty here to prompt purists and revisionists alike to find fault with Fennell’s approach.Yet for those looking for a new window into to this perennial classic, and who are comfortable with the radical flourish for which Fennell is already known, it’s an engrossing and intellectually stimulating exploration of this iconic story in a way that exchanges comfortable familiarity for unpredictable chaos — and for cinema fans, that’s more than enough reason to give “Wuthering Heights” a chance. (John Paul King in Los Angeles Blade)
Robbie puts in the worst performance of her career by turning Catherine into a bratty, unbearable hypocrite; meanwhile, Elordi’s script must have only said, ”Stare maniacally”.The film also struggles with its presentation. So much of it feels like a scene from Alice in Wonderland, but without the charm. It’s drab and gross.Even the scenes in Edgar Linton’s mansion, which is supposed to be a grander-than-life setting, have an unsettling, unnatural sheen. It’s like the entire film was shot on a stage, but instead of sets, the film chooses to have a nasty greenscreen backdrop.Funnell committed a terrible practical joke by releasing this film on the weekend of Valentine’s Day. Every couple expecting an intimate, romantic depiction of a famous novel will instead be subjected to a cruel and unusual parody.The film is a miserable experience and is the first truly horrible movie of 2026.Wuthering Heights is showing in cinemas around the country. (Jarryd Rowley in Region)
Then again, maybe Fennell is just having a laugh at our expense. If you want to watch a spiritually faithful adaptation of Wuthering Heights, complete with sexually charged graveyard visits, a decades-long real estate scheme, and uh, yearning in spades, Saltburn is already that movie. It’s hard not to suspect that Fennell, in her clever and cynical way, just wanted to see if she could get away with turning fantasy casting plucked from the recesses of Tumblr into a major motion picture. Because the only other explanation I can conjure for the gooey mess that is “Wuthering Heights” is that Fennell doesn’t realize her promising artistic vision has been cuckooed by something all too ordinary instead. (Nicole Penn in The Dispatch)
The film "Wuthering Heights" is an anti-love story that goes for visual feast and shock factor with the way the characters fulfilled their sexual fantasies rather than an exploration of a fierce love that defies class and convention. (Rachelle Siazon in Philippine Entertainment Portal)
“Cumbres borrascosas”, el libro, el clásico, no se parece a nada porque lleva los vínculos al límite.Heathcliff no es un héroe trágico: es la violencia que una sociedad ejerce sobre él y la que él mismo reproduce, implacable. Catherine queda atrapada entre su deseo y la necesidad de encajar en un orden que la asfixia-Por eso el libro sigue ahí, embrujándonos a todos, y mucho más arriesgado que esta adaptación que le baja el voltaje y la convierte en una versión vistosa, hot y descremada. (Verónica Bonacchi in Diario Rio Negro) (Translation)
Brontë no buscaba la perfección romántica; creó un universo de pasión desmedida, de frustración y de tormento. Un amor áspero, inquietante, que deja el alma en desasosiego. La película, en cambio, parece desconfiar de la inteligencia del espectador, como si fuera necesario subrayarlo todo, explicarlo todo, hacerlo más evidente —incluso a través de escenas prescindibles— para garantizar su comprensión.El final, además, da la impresión de cerrar definitivamente la puerta a la continuación de la historia, como si la segunda generación nunca hubiera existido.En conclusión, si deseas disfrutar plenamente de la película, quizá sea mejor no haber leído la novela. Pero si lo que buscas es comprender la intensidad, la oscuridad y la complejidad del amor que imaginó Emily Brontë, entonces acude al libro… y no esperes demasiado de la película. (María Beatriz Muñoz Ruiz in Diario Sabemos) (Translation)
El resultado es una película que traiciona el espíritu del libro en nombre de una supuesta autenticidad. Porque el corazón de Cumbres borrascosas no es el sexo; es la imposibilidad. Es la herida abierta de un amor que no encuentra lugar en el mundo. Es el resentimiento que fermenta durante años. Es la crueldad que nace del abandono. La novela es violenta, pero su violencia es moral, psicológica, casi metafísica. Aquí, en cambio, la violencia se sexualiza. El dolor se erotiza. Y el espectador asiste a una saturación de escenas íntimas que no construyen personaje ni conflicto: solo ocupan tiempo.Y, sin embargo, la película ofrece una paradoja que la redime parcialmente. En su tramo final, cuando el frenesí carnal se agota y los cuerpos dejan de ocupar el centro del encuadre, algo cambia. De repente, el silencio vuelve a tener peso. Las palabras, esas grandes ausentes durante buena parte del metraje, recuperan su lugar. Los personajes hablan, se enfrentan, se reprochan, se reconocen. Y entonces, casi milagrosamente, la película encuentra la profundidad que había estado buscando a golpes de piel.Es en ese último acto -cuando el deseo ya no se expresa en sudor sino en diálogo- donde asoma la grandeza que el conjunto prometía. Las miradas pesan más que los cuerpos. Las frases hieren más que cualquier escena explícita. El dolor se verbaliza y, al hacerlo, adquiere una dimensión trágica que conecta, por fin, con el espíritu de la novela. Resulta irónico que la adaptación alcance su mejor momento precisamente cuando renuncia a su estrategia más insistente. (Amanda Ramos in El Plural) (Translation)
Una adaptación es una lectura, y las lecturas se definen no sólo por lo que se conserva del original, sino por lo que se elimina. Esa chica de 14 años, si le creemos a Fennell, quería más sexo, y por qué no. Cathy y Heathcliff se lo merecen. Pero hay muchas otras cosas que llevan al infierno en Cumbres Borrascosas, y acá es donde aparecen los lectores con el texto en la mano, porque esas otras cosas son esenciales y no están en la película, ni en texto ni en subtexto.Fennell decide que Heathcliff no sea un abusador, un golpeador y un hombre cruel. ¿Por qué? Heathcliff, de origen incierto, es una víctima de abusos, está tan dañado que se transformó en un monstruo vengativo y solo se hizo rico para destruir a quienes lo rechazaron, maltrataron, degradaron y aislaron. El Heathcliff de Fennell recibe una paliza, pide permiso hasta para besar y jamás resulta peligroso. ¿Por qué llamarlo Heathcliff, entonces? ¿Si no se suicida, es Ofelia la de Hamlet? Fennell también cambia a la esposa de Heathcliff, Isabella, que en la película tiene una relación sadomasoquista con él, más o menos consentida, y chistosa. Elegir como alivio cómico a una mujer en cuatro patas, atada a la chimenea de lo caliente que está con Jacob Elordi es una provocación, por supuesto. Pero resulta que en la novela, esa mujer, después de ser golpeada, y (seguro) violada y encerrada, logra escapar con siete meses de embarazo y tira su anillo a la chimenea de marras, y esto en 1847, cuando la esposa era propiedad del marido. Es muy radical. ¿Por qué convertirla en alguien de quien reírse?Los ejemplos pueden seguir, pero la decisión es clara: la tragedia está aplanada y sustituida por la historia de dos enamorados pasionales separados por las circunstancias y enloquecidos de deseo. En la novela, Heathcliff no vuelve en plan recuperar a su amada, regresa como una tormenta de odio que condensa y perpetúa toda la injusticia social que provocó su daño irreversible. No es cuestión de purismo.(...)A veces, ser ligero y provocador es un alivio, es frescura y fiesta, una forma de desafío al poder. Y otras veces, como en estas Cumbres borrascosas, esa ligereza resulta hueca y reaccionaria. (Translation)
La visione di Fennell, innegabilmente personale, piena di gusto per l’iperbole e di forte intensità visiva, si scontra in definitiva con ciò che rende 'Cime tempestose' un classico: la sua capacità di trasformare dolore e desiderio in un’esperienza narrativa che non si esaurisce nello sguardo ma scava nelle viscere del lettore. Così alla fine, uscendo dalla sala, resta la sensazione di aver assistito a qualcosa di intenso ma incompleto. Come se il film avesse scelto di incarnare la tempesta, rinunciando deliberatamente a mostrarci le sue conseguenze. (Dario Vassallo in PrimoCanale) (Translation)
The best -known adaptation (until this year) is probably the 1939 film with Laurence Olivier and Merle Oberon – although AIP tried their luck with Timothy Dalton in 1970, and Cliff Richard did a musical Heathcliff, and there was a very respected 1953 BBC television version starring Richard Todd from a script by Nigel (Quatermass Experiment) Kneale. In fact, that BBC version was so respected that in 1959 the ABC decided “wow let’s use 1700 pounds to shoot this script even though it would be cheaper just to import a kinescope of the BBC production and we could have spent the rest of the funds on shooting a something local.” Incidentally, the BBC filmed Kneale’s script again in 1962 with Claire Bloom and Australia’s own Keith Michell in the leads – so, even if Kneale wrote it very hastily, by his own admission, he did pretty well out of it.We’ll be upfront – we haven’t seen the 1959 ABC TV film of Wuthering Heights. It’s entirely possible that no copy survives – but we’ve read a lot about it and reproduce what knowledge we’ve ascertained below. (...)The driving force behind the production was director Alan Burke, who specifically asked to do it. Burke was a competent director and from all accounts a very nice man, but like many Australian directors of his time (and now) he really wanted to be directing foreign scripts rather than local ones. (...)Burke’s production of Wuthering Heights starred deejay Lew Luton as Heathcliff, Delia Williams as Cathy, Annette Andre as Isabella, and Richard Davies as Hindley. It was shot in Sydney and was mostly done live with some prerecorded segments. (Read more) (Stephen Vagg)
Jane Eyre 2011If you’re looking to put more of the psychological in psychological romance, this movie should do it. It’s what Fennell’s movie should have had, with more book accuracy and a weird plot twist. (Hannah Trimble)
Ragioni e sentimenti - radici dei classici e narrazione contemporanea - è il tema di “Incontri d’Autore”, la trasmissione coordinata da Francesca Cosentino, a cura della redazione Cultura e Spettacoli del Giornale Radio Rai, in onda domenica 22 febbraio su Rai Radio1 alle 00.40, per parlare di libri, di letteratura e di tutto quanto ci gira intorno. (...) Natalia Augias racconta della biografia di Charlotte Bronte scritta da Eleonor Houghton. Classici e cinema, le tante versioni di "Cime tempestose” - il servizio è di Baba Richerme. (Translation)
The Brussels Brontë Blog posts a summary of a recent talk by Jones Hayden, who set out to prove that the Brontë sisters had a genuine sense of humour, drawing on comic moments, witty character names, and laugh-out-loud exchanges from across their novels.
%20(1).v1.jpg)
